Better than nothing?

Better than nothing?

Last week the Boston Globe printed an article criticizing limited-benefit medical plans. Today, the Globe printed a letter from the president of one of the companies that writes the plans.

It is easy to say that every American should have comprehensive healthcare coverage. We all agree with that… The key question is this: Is having no coverage at all better than having a limited-benefit medical plan? I think not.

Well it really depends. If you’re paying for the plan yourself, you’d probably do better putting the amount of the premiums aside in a savings account or contributing to an IRA. If your employer is paying, then yes, it’s better than nothing.

February 5, 2006

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *